[BenLurkin]

". . .that IS eugenics . . ." How So? Are you saying there is a link between genetics ans poverty?

" . . . given the life expectancies of the genders . . ." Life expectancy yes. Fertility/abilty to successfully carry child to term - no way.

"What a load" Let's have a conversation before you come on that strong, FRiend.

[discostu]

Once you start deciding people of a certain category, whether you're deciding that category by race distance between the eyes or income level, aren't allowed to breed you are practicing eugenics. By seeking to break the cycle of poverty by ending breeding you are saying there's a genetic link to poverty.

Depends on if the woman is having kids or not. We're learning that on the female side fertility is like any other physical activity: practice makes perfect. Women that don't have kids lose the ability very early, women that keep having kids keep the ability for a long time (my grandmother's sister had her last of 13 at age 46, no complications).

Another thing to consider when deciding who should have the nip and tuck based on the possibility of wanting to reverse that decision is that tube tying is easier to undo than vascectomies.

I plead lack of morning caffiene, you're right I came on too strong and I apologize, thanks for giving me a second chance.